by Jon Rappoport
April 9, 2013
This isn’t a leak. It isn’t a timid flow. It’s a flood.
I’m talking about about the criticism of
Monsanto’s so-called science of
genetically-engineered food. For the past 20 years, independent
researchers have been attacking Monsanto science in various ways,
and finally the NY Times has joined the crowd.
But it’s the way Mark Bittman, lead food columnist for the
Times magazine, does it that really the crashes the whole GMO
Writing in his April 2 column, “Why
Do G.M.O.’s Need Protection?”,
Bittman leads with this:
“Genetic engineering in agriculture
has disappointed many people who once had hopes for it.”
As in: the party’s over, turn out the
“…genetic engineering, or, more
properly, transgenic engineering - in which a gene, usually from
another species of plant, bacterium or animal, is inserted into
a plant in the hope of positively changing its nature - has been
As if this weren’t enough, Bittman
spells it out more specifically:
“In the nearly 20 years of applied
use of G.E. in agriculture there have been two notable
‘successes,’ along with a few less notable ones.
These are crops resistant to
Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide (Monsanto develops both the seeds
and the herbicide to which they’re resistant) and crops that
contain their own insecticide.
The first have already failed, as
so-called superweeds have developed resistance to Roundup, and
the second are showing signs of failing, as insects are able to
develop resistance to the inserted Bt toxin - originally a
bacterial toxin - faster than new crop variations can be
Bittman goes on to write that superweed
resistance was a foregone conclusion; scientists understood, from
the earliest days of GMOs, that spraying generations of these weeds
with Roundup would give us exactly what we have today: failure of
the technology to prevent what it was designed to prevent.
The weeds wouldn’t die out.
They would retool and thrive.
“The result is that the biggest
crisis in monocrop agriculture - something like 90 percent of
all soybeans and 70 percent of corn is grown using Roundup Ready
seed - lies in glyphosate’s inability to any longer provide
total or even predictable control, because around a dozen weed
species have developed resistance to it.”
Glyphosate is the active ingredient
Just as the weeds developed resistance and immunity to the
herbicide, insects that were supposed to be killed by the toxin
engineered into Monsanto’s BT crops are also surviving.
Five years ago, it would have been unthinkable that the NY Times
would print such a complete rejection of GMO plant technology. Now,
it’s “well, everybody knows.”
The Times sees no point in holding back any longer.
Of course, if it were a newspaper with any real courage, it would
launch a whole series of front-page pieces on this enormous failure,
and the gigantic fraud that lies behind it. Then the Times might
actually see its readership improve.
Momentum is something its editors understand well enough. You set
your hounds loose on a story, you send them out with a mandate to
expose failure, fraud, and crime down to their roots, and you know
that, in the ensuing months, formerly reticent researchers and
corporate employees and government officials will appear out of the
woodwork confessing their insider knowledge.
The story will deepen. It will take on new branches.
The revelations will indict,
In this case,
the FDA and
the USDA will come in for major
They will backtrack and lie and mis-explain,
for a while, and then, like buds in the spring, agency employees
will emerge and admit the truth. These agencies were
And once the story unravels far enough, the human health hazards and
destruction wreaked by GMOs will take center stage. All the bland
pronouncements about “nobody has gotten sick from GMOs” will
evaporate in the wind.
It won’t simply be,
“Well, we never tested health
dangers adequately,” it’ll be, “We knew there was trouble from
Yes, the Times could make all this
happen. But it won’t.
There are two basic reasons. First, it
considers Big Ag too big to fail. There is now so much acreage in
America tied up in GMO crops that to reject the whole show would
cause titanic eruptions on many levels.
And second, the Times is part of the very establishment that views
the GMO industry as a way of bringing Globalism to fruition for the
Centralizing the food supply in a few hands means the population of
the world, in the near future, will eat or not eat according to the
dictates of a few unelected men.
Redistribution of basic resources to the
people of Earth, from such a control point, is what Globalism is all
“Naturally, we love you all, but
decisions must be made. You people over here will live well, you
people over there will live not so well, and you people back
there will live not at all.
“This is our best judgment. Don’t worry, be happy.”